Place your bets! Vz58 vs the mud test...

[CitizenPete]

If you follow or support InRange on Full 30 you may know that Karl and Ian have been testing various rifles with mud.  Mud is probably not the correct noun, as it sounds and looks more like wet sand.  The M1 Garand and the AK failed to cycle.


Karl tells me the Vz58 was already put though the barrel and the video is forthcoming.  So stay tuned.


I think if they shovel the sandy soup ("mud") over the vz58 and it is fluid enough to get between the slight gap between the spring cover and the carrier, or up in the gas blocks,  then we may see any or all of the following:


- Failure to chamber
- Failure to cycle (single shot)
- Gremlin
- Unintended multiple shot firing


But of course I am hoping for it to work, where others have failed! 


My bet is that it will not pass without issue if the barrel is up out of the wheelbarrow and the sand gets in between the carrier and spring cover or inter gas and/or site block.


Bet: will not pass


Vz58 Test:  To be determined


AKM test: failed
https://www.full30.com/video/753d617d16a9cb6c09526519a0740313


M1 Garand test: failed
https://www.full30.com/video/a9145047584c659d45aacc4e1392d2e3


AR15: PASSED
https://www.full30.com/video/a9145047584c659d45aacc4e1392d2e3

[vblue42]

I'm gonna say it will perform beyond the others. Not that it won't fail at some point. But that it will perform better. We'll see.

[RSR]

MAC did a galil ace test too, different "mud" though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVuI8J8irP0

Do note, InRange are in the desert (AZ, right?) so that "mud" is really probably more like 80-120 grit wet sandpaper... 

The lack of an enclosed piston code bode very badly for the VZ58 in this sort of test if 80-120 wet grit sandpaper gets in the handguard...  Receiver plus piston friction under the rear sight block could be a full stop.  If it stays out of the handguard, I think the VZ58 could surprise.  My main concern for dead stop is rear top cover serves as a blade to dump all the crap on the bolt carrier down into the receiver/magazine...

InRange also did an AR15 vs M1A vs MAS 49/56 test too awhile back; believe they discussed the VZ58 in one of the videos at the time -- both mud and sand here though:
mud: https://www.full30.com/video/9eef6b3a4eb6c8846a4c8dc4b8968bc4
sand: https://www.full30.com/video/6618755f336970e55e6c50c1fe894ff8

Please post the video here when you see it.  Look forward to it.

[CitizenPete]

MAC and InRange are possibly going to collaborate on some tests.  I had watched the MAC tests, more like dirty water, however he does stomp them into the mud.  The InRange sand is the killer.

[RSR]

To help bide the time, here are some existing VZ58 stress tests:

Burial:
https://youtu.be/kbZ12tD3Buk

400 rounds full auto:
https://youtu.be/VSLV9rd53vw

Water test:
https://youtu.be/qs9zqhcUPyU

[RSR]

Another, in written form:

I was at the range with a buddy of mine yesterday. He had an AK in 5.45mm and I took my Yugo M92 and my VZ58. He told me he was thinking about getting a 7.62x39 rifle and asked me which AK he should consider. "None" was my reply, "Buy a VZ. It's everything an AK is and more." "But what about reliability?" he asked. Well, that was my cue!! I disassembled the VZ and promptly began filling it with pine needles, leaves that had been out rotting all winter, mud, pebbles, rotted tree bark, and clay that was the consistency of Jif peanut butter. I packed the handguards....as in PACKED. I filled the top cover almost solid and filled the receiver up to the bottom of the bolt. I put it back together....more like forced, and ran the bolt back and forth a couple of times. Crazy knashing and gritty feeling!!! Took the top cover off and shook both the rifle and topcover a couple of times and reassembled it again. Then I inserted a mag and proceeded to empty it. Crap was flying everywhere but no jam..... of course. Steve's jaw dropped. I asked him what he thought would happen if I did this with an AR? We agreed that it would have probably resulted in catastrophic failure. "So", I asked, "what do you think?" He said two words......"I'm sold." Good times baby.....good times!!!!

Source: http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?96833-I-would-call-the-VZ58-reliable

And some previous, no longer available vids too; here's a written one:
http://www.czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=41284.15

Some things to know about that vid:

- the rifle was a brand new Czech Small Arms (formerly D-Technik) 11.75" VZ 58 Sporter.
- it was oiled, not greased. The importer wanted it that way. 
- roughly 1k was fired continuously over about 20 minutes, 5 rounds at a time.
- at about 600 rounds the front of the plastic handguard melted through and it fell off.
- it was about -20 C out.
- it had numerous feed issues due to mags not fully locking in place. I had the same problem with my CSA til I modded a spare extended mag release.
- I'm the guy in the blue and red snowmobile suit.

It was a ridiculous test, not representative of any sort of reasonable use, even for a FA military gun.

Oh, it was a good time. Burning someone else's ammo always is! The gun got so hot everything forward of the middle of the receiver was too hot to hold, even with gloves on. I'm surprised it didn't cook off. Burned the paint off for a couple inches on either side of the gas block, too.

My preference for grease has more to do with it staying where you put it and, in my experience, not disappearing as much as oil when you get a rifle good and hot. In that test, the gun really wasn't that dirty before it got buried in the mud we made. But that's not shown in the video.

No, after the 1k, then shook the muck off and shot it some more.

The stoppages were mostly magazine related, as I said earlier. Once we figured out which ones wouldn't seat correctly, we took them out of the rotation. I'd attribute a few of the stoppages to a brand-new, under-lubed rifle, but not many.

[CitizenPete]

Posted (added to original post) without comment .... AR15 Mud Test - PASSED.

[omar787]

I just saw the test CitizenPete I couldn't believe it 

[CitizenPete]

Dead Dog.

https://www.full30.com/video/2433e21e96a5be6f3b1633ba509c5e59

[MCinMD]

As they admit, it's a pretty impossible test.  The videos are entertaining but I don't see them as overly informative.

[CitizenPete]

As they admit, it's a pretty impossible test.  The videos are entertaining but I don't see them as overly informative.

Agreed, but I just have a hard time seeing the AR win the "mud trophy", when in the "real world" I have seen them have troubles while the VZ.58 kept going without issue.  It's like everything I learned from the tactical range classes was a lie.

[RSR]

Since mods locked the other thread, adding them here:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/01/27/mud-will-always-get-inrange-desecrates-vz-58/
 

Looks like the topcover stripped all the mud off the bolt carrier into the action...  One of my primary guess in CP's thread...  Overall, I'm not a fan of this InRange test, but YMMV...  It is an interesting test, but in any real world use, unless one is in the middle of combat, the moment a weapon dropped into quicksand or similar, one would clean it asap...

Here, the issue was the bolt not going into battery...  Remove the mag, grab a canteen and flush out the forward rails and chamber area.  Run cleaning rod or boresnake through the bore and then get back to testing.  Overall this test design seems shortsighted...  Stuff like sand tests, frost test (freeze, take weapon out to warm up where moisture condensates and freeze again), etc, type of tests seem better measures of reliability beyond the standard round counts between required cleaning, etc, type of tests.

That said, I've been thinking about this and they talked about it in the video text edits too... 
OOW calls the VZ58 striker a "linear hammer"... 
With striker fired pistols, the striker and firing pin is one piece, and often pulling the trigger assists in cocking the striker... 
With the VZ58, it's two piece.  I really think "linear hammer" is a far better description for this action than "striker."  While perhaps it's in the weeds, I think it's important and will be changing my references when discussions arise regarding action type -- for parts, I'll probably stick with striker when discussing the "linear hammer" but either works...  Again, YMMV.

Watched the videos for the VZ, the AK, and the AR.  Interesting results.  It seems to come down what's appropriate to what situation.  I can see that the tight tolerances kept the mud out of the AR and the loose tolerances allowed the mud into the VZ and AK.  But that also has a flip side.  If the VZ or AK jam as demonstrated, it doesn't take much to open them up and clear them -- that, however, takes the gun out of the fight for at least a couple of minutes, which, obviously, could be disastrous.  The AR stays in the fight -- a huge advantage.  But if an AR jams -- and I've seen it more than once -- it's likely that the AR is out of the fight until someone can get it into a vise and start digging in.  That's also disastrous, especially if away from any tools or support. 

So the reliability is relative to the situation.  A jam in the VZ or AK can take someone out of the fight for a couple of minutes, and a jam in the AR can take someone out of the fight for a couple of minutes, a couple of hours, up to forever.  Which time frame is the most lethal?  Again, depends on the situation.

I've been at the range a few times where a buddy's AR decided to seize and was done for the day.  There was never any mud involved.  It then took them a couple of hours at home to fix the problem.  I've had a jam with my SKS and VZ2008 due to bad ammo and the open nature of the bolt allowed me to clear it in a few seconds.  I kept shooting my rifle, and my buddy also kept shooting... my rifle.

The only time I've had a bear of a time with the VZ was when I vigorously attempted to remove the dust cover without first pulling the trigger to release the striker.  What a nightmare that was.  An hour of prying, wrangling, cursing, and a ruined dust cover later, I got the rifle apart.  It was an intimate getting-to-know-you time with the VZ platform.

Citizen Pete has a good tactical class report in this forum from a couple of years back relating some of the problems his classmates with AR's had in comparison to the problems he didn't have with his VZ.

It's not tolerances - it's clearances.

But yes - not a lot of clearance in some rifles - makes them choke fairly easily if stuff gets inside.  The fantastic part of the AR design is the almost totally sealed system as long as the dust cover is closed and fairly closed when it's open.

[RSR]

So regarding here and locked thread -- in the video, the issue is one of it not firing due to not going into battery...  They didn't verify that there were any issues with the fcg getting fouled, or with the weapon being unable to cycle with all that crud.

The top cover served a squeegee to dump all the crap from bolt carrier into the receiver...  Had they repeated this test like with other weapon systems where they cleaned out, buried, and then rinsed off the bolt carrier before firing -- as anyone with the least amount of sense would do -- it likely would have fired...  Not unlike the Funker tactical test posted earlier... 
Actually, or further, I find MACs tests far more realistic than InRanges...  It takes a special kind of neglect to get a weapon that InRange dirty and expect it to perform.  To cross say a stream or creek and get your weapon submerged or crawl through a wet ditch and do the same, the sediment and whatnot in that water would be similar to a MAC test.  And yes, those types of approaches would be common in patrols or other combat maneuvers...  InRange's strikes me more as a WWI trench warfare type of abuse scenario where both you and your weapon in are in a constant state of complete filth, recognizing that all foxholes can get muddy yet soldiers manage to keep their weapons clean...

While I can't see into the action, I can say with a high degree of certainty that the crud must have been blocking the firing pin and/or not allowing bolt carrier to continue forward to point where primer and firing pin aligned.
Why?
B/c the out of battery safety is also the f/a trip lever that the ATF foolishly (in regards to weapon safety) required to be removed (two sears in standard configuration -- f/a trip lever releases/deactivates the right "auto" sear when in semi-auto mode so that the striker/linear hammer can be released with the semi auto

sear when the trigger is pulled; the left, s/a sear is deactivated in entirety in f/a mode.   By my understanding, the weapon should fire out of battery due to how most VZ58s are converted to semi-auto...

In regards to Horse's comment -- ARs are typically manufactured to tight tolerances and clearances, whereas AKs often are manufactured to looser tolerances and clearances...  That said, tolerances reflect the range in which a weapon will function as designed and clearances are the amount of space to allow stuff to work its way out, also as designed...   Bottom line, Horse is right on terminology.
Personally, though not correct, I usually think of clearances as features like sand cuts on Fal bolts, and tolerances as features like the wobble between an AK bolt and receiver... 

Back to my original point -- clearances (properly used) do matter; however, other design components can compensate for those clearances.  Mike Pannone has written a few good AR reliability pieces for Defense Review.  In those, he discusses how heavier buffers and recoil and extractor springs help to account for fouling in tight clearance ARs...  Here's the best one where he ran a BCM AR over 2.5k rounds w/ no lube and just spring and buffer upgrades: http://www.defensereview.com/the-big-m4-myth-fouling-caused-by-the-direct-impingement-gas-system-makes-the-m4-unreliable/
Heavier bolt carriers on AKs and VZ58s work similarly to adding heavy buffers to ARs...  And AKs have xtra power springs available, but the VZ58 does not insofar as I'm aware...

Further in regards to clearances, AKs have large clearances on pretty much all components...  VZ58s have tight clearances between the BCG and upper receiver, but looser clearances for the bolt itself (until it locks into battery) -- the VZ58 also lacks clearance cuts on bolt carrier rails, but bolt can push stuff back into the receiver and down into the mag well via it's locking tab cuts and a limited amount forward...  The amount of crap in the video obviously exceeded the clearance/self-cleaning clearances designed into this weapon system...

[gwvt]

Yeah, it seems pretty obvious that the cover scraped all the mud off the carrier and into the receiver on the first shot and yeah, it seems like common sense to rinse the thing off before firing it, at the very least. Someone commenting on the video even suggested rinsing first would have made a difference but the OP seemed to miss the point in his reply. Most of these tests seem dumb to me but I watch them anyway!

[RSR]

Read through the comments:

While I enjoy many of InRange's videos, when they want to make a point I think they're the type to proceed on course... 

MAC snow test referenced in comments at 7:30 here, VZ58 segment (Ohio Ordinance version) starts at 6:00:
https://youtu.be/R0bNuASug_o

Note: Again not firing due to bolt not going fully into battery after bolt locked back and magwell/chamber area fully packed with snow.   With chamber fully packed with snow, clears just the snow/ice packed between bolt carrier and rear sight block that's preventing the bolt carrier from coming forward with two flicks of his finger -- and then claims it's not as good as the AK...  Jamb a baseball sized ball of snow into an AK to compare, and unless the AK has a safety lever with a notch, there's no bolt hold open to try and pack in snow into the significantly smaller ejection port.  Seems like a silly test to turn a function that gives a huge advantage, like the last shot bolt hold open, and then claim it to be a detriment -- equivalent would be with bolt carrier forward, in which case the VZ58 is more sealed w/ safety off than the AK...  Anyhow, enough discussion of confirmation bias.

EDIT: 2nd round of testing/buried in snow starts 14:00. With bolt carrier forward, it worked fine.